<quoted text>classic Dan."make sure the couple is not closely related".Say Dan, why do we do that?Procreation concerns?at the time of MARRIAGE?But they are not related at all, right?Should we do so for gays?WHY???Thanks for pointing out a rational difference....

Err.......gays aren't getting married and having their own offspring. Hence the homosexuality aspect.

<quoted text>That's the part i apparently have to do to have a few rational discussions around here...I don't love it, but I don;t fear it that's for sure...You do appreciate that many on your side literally try to bully people off the board, right?

Pointing out facts over your lost opinions is not really a form of bullying.

<quoted text>If you think I 'badger' you I apoligize. With your continued insults towards others I never knew you were that sensitive.But understand...if I were to call you a hypocritical bitch over your stance others come down on you it is merely a form a identifying what you illustrate yourself to be.LOL!!!

are you translating this from another language or something?it reads like instructions from ikea.

Funny, I don't change my name in a transparent attempt to post as other users, frequently copy clip from legal decisions that have been superseded by acts of the legislature, and fail to support my argument.

The reality is that in the end you side will lose, because your argument is patently unconstitutional. You would like to hold fellow US citizens as second class citizens with less than equal protection of the law. Every time that an attempt has been made to sustain such unequal protections of the law based upon historical precedent it is failed. It failed when the attempt was made to deny interracial couples the right to marry; it failed when the attempt was made to segregate the races; it failed when the attempt was made to deny women the right to vote; and perhaps most famously, it failed when the attempt was made to keep the slave trade going.

Equality will come to pass, because those like yourself can't present a single rational argument against it.

<quoted text>Lady(???),They could be an instructional pamphlet on how to successfully open a box of Cheerios, pour it into a bowl and add milk and sugar for a morning breakfast and you no doubt would be just as lost.LOL!!!!

are you claiming that post was well written or do you wish you could take it back?

<quoted text>Funny, I don't change my name in a transparent attempt to post as other users,

glad you saw is was transparent, and thus not "devious"...again, it was a joke...

lides wrote:

<quoted text>frequently copy clip from legal decisions

yah, you NEVER do that no matter how many times I ask you to support yourself, you NEVER will!its funny you see me citing exactly io where courts have said what I am saying as a weakness...

lides wrote:

<quoted text> clip from legal decisions that have been superseded by acts of the legislature,

nope you used one overturned by the 9th circuit which I proved to you. yet you fail to prove hernandez was "superceded" and I notice you don't say overruled...and that you bring this up rather than address the content of those cut and pastes which you also NEVER DO...

and you get so worked up...calm down skippy...its not life and death !

<quoted text>I get that, and hence the no "marriage right" aspect...see how that works?

I think that suggesting that marrying your sister is illegal only because of procreation is a little disingenuous. Gay marriage laws still exclude close relatives as spouses and no procreation concerns exist. Nice try though.

<quoted text>glad you saw is was transparent, and thus not "devious"...again, it was a joke...<quoted text>yah, you NEVER do that no matter how many times I ask you to support yourself, you NEVER will!its funny you see me citing exactly io where courts have said what I am saying as a weakness...<quoted text>nope you used one overturned by the 9th circuit which I proved to you.yet you fail to prove hernandez was "superceded" and I notice you don't say overruled...and that you bring this up rather than address the content of those cut and pastes which you also NEVER DO...and you get so worked up...calm down skippy...its not life and death !

Though I doubt you'll comprehend I wnted to point out rulings and decisions regarding this aspect of allowing gays to marry will eventually have to abide by the Constitution and what we are as a free nation and for that I can only see those holding barriers against gay marriage as an eroding wall which will one day fall completely.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.